Perhaps I missed it, but I'm wondering why Pathfinder chose to change how domains and specialist wizards are handled. I liked the bonus spell system, and the change seems fly against the stated compatibility goal. These two changes are definitely my least favorite.
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
I actually like the new changes, the new Domain and Specialist abilities are better than the one bonus spell per lvl and the domain bonus. Plus allowing the Druid to pick a Domain is kinda cool. Only thing I don not like is the 8HD per Nercomancer caster lvl. I think it needs toned down just a little. Say +2HD for lvls 1-7 (6HD/lvl), +4HD for 8-15 (8HD/lvl), and +6HD at 16+ (10HD/lvl).
While I do like the change I wish they could have done more. Maybe add Sub-Schools to the Schools. Like White or Black for Necromacy or Summoning Teleportation for Conjuration, stuff like that.
We must play different games because every wizard in every game I've ever played has specialized. An extra spell each level was too much of a draw.
I agree that this in balance should be fixed, but I wonder why fix it by removing the bonus spell.
As for clerics, I never found anyone complain about the bonus domain spell, so why change it? It just creates incompatibility.
RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16
|
In most of the games I've been in, specialists were the norm, for the bonus spells.
As for the alpha changes, I not only think that they're great, but wanted to point out that in general, the schools and domains now grant more abilities per day, which is one of the big reasons for the change. Each has a 1st level power usable at will, which goes a long way at lower levels to giving the caster something to do other than use his crossbow or mace once they're out of spells. In addition, they each give a power that's usable multiple times per day, based on caster level, thus freeing up even more spell slots for other options.
As for sub-schools, I think that they would be easy to add as additional options, even if they're not in the Core rulebook. Same goes with alternate specialities, such as wild magic, true name magic, shadow magic, elemental based magic, etc.
I like em as well.Nice flavor now gives a real resone to take one .
Wizards may now select an object as a familiar. What about the "no familiar" options mentioned in Dragon magazine? Its even a Paizo product, but they are not included in Pathfinder. Why?
Because Wizards/Hasbro, not Paizo, owns the rights to all of the Dragon material.
Being able to cast 0-level spells at will is a BAD idea. Very bad. Cure minor wounds had to be done away with. What about repair minor? Maybe the entire party should be comprised of Warforged. With create water and purify food, hunger and thirst are no more.
Again, warforged are not open game content; Paizo can't use them. If you do, it's easy enough to do unto minor repair as Paizo has with cure minor wounds.
|
I'm guessing that much of the rework had to do with the relative power levels of the different Schools and Domains. I've seen a lot of 3.5 Evokers, not so many Diviners or Conjurers. The Pathfinder rules even them out a lot, in ways that cannot be addressed with the existing School/Domain Spell lists.
And the powers and 0-level spells are there to work on the 15 minute Adventuring Day.
|
|
Kind of a side question, but ...
When did we learn that the Druid will be able to pick a Domain? That wasn't in the Alpha document was it? Obviously we haven't seen the Paizo take on the Druid yet. Did I miss something???
As for the topic at hand, I don't mind the new version of specialist wizards at all, although I never had a problem with the 3.5 version either. I guess I'm neutral on this one. I DO like that Clerics get to use BOTH their Domain powers now instead of being forced to pick one or the other!
I actually like the new changes, the new Domain and Specialist abilities are better than the one bonus spell per lvl and the domain bonus. Plus allowing the Druid to pick a Domain is kinda cool. Only thing I don not like is the 8HD per Nercomancer caster lvl. I think it needs toned down just a little. Say +2HD for lvls 1-7 (6HD/lvl), +4HD for 8-15 (8HD/lvl), and +6HD at 16+ (10HD/lvl).
Kind of a side question, but ...
When did we learn that the Druid will be able to pick a Domain? That wasn't in the Alpha document was it? Obviously we haven't seen the Paizo take on the Druid yet. Did I miss something???
As for the topic at hand, I don't mind the new version of specialist wizards at all, although I never had a problem with the 3.5 version either. I guess I'm neutral on this one. I DO like that Clerics get to use BOTH their Domain powers now instead of being forced to pick one or the other!
Look at the page where the Domains are first listed. It says, I believe, that Clrs can choose two domains of their deity, and Drds can choose one domain from Air, Earth, Fire, Water, Animal and Plant.
I like the new specialists, but they do not give enough choice, as not every wizard is the same. I just think that there should be a choice of two spells when they get the Specialist Spell-Likes.
|
Since the birth of 3.0, I've seen two specialists.
The access to all spells is the *only* reason to play a Wizard over a Sorcerer, who, much like the Specialist, has more spells per day than the Wizard, and doesn't have to worry about a spellbook, and, unlike the specialist, can pick whatever spells he wants anyway, from any school, and, like the Wizard, fill in the blanks with Scrolls, which, the specialist, again, can't do in the case of 'forbidden' spells!
In all cases, the Sorcerer spanks the Specialist at it's own game, IMO.
This idea of giving specialists actual abilities that suit their class, instead of making them handicapped wannabe Wizards, was great when WotC introduced it in Unearthed Arcana, and it's still great now that Pathfinder and Monte's Book of Experimental Might have gotten into the action.
What's ironic is that a Wizard has to give up access to a quarter of his potential spell list to gain an extra spell / level, *which the Cleric gets for free from Domains!*
Since the birth of 3.0 I have had one player choose a specialist(evoker). The 3.0 and 3.5 versions did not excite my players like the PFRPG version has.
I have really enjoyed making three NPC specialist wizards for my playtest group.
And THAT is what I like about PFRPG.
Set hit the nail on the head. Since 3e, I've seen one diviner, and any number of non-specialist wizards. Players with sorcerer PCs, on the other hand, wanted to know why THEY couldn't specialize, and I was hard put to explain to them that with their already-limited lists, giving them an extra spell known per level was a bigger plus than for a wizard, but that giving up schools was less of a blow.
I may not have entirely read the school specialist class feature of the wizard correctly, but there are 11 opportunties to gain a power of a school specialist, but there are only 8 schools?
Is this an error? Can you take a specialist power more than once?
Eric
Eric, I think the deal is, you're either a specialist in one particular school for your entire career, or you're not. If so, you get each of your school's specialist powers listed, once, when you hit the level listed for it. You don't get to pick and choose from level to level, unless Paizo is REALLY breaking from all tradition.
|
|
Honestly, I like the new system. I run a bunch of email game and often see new players. Too often, I hear new players ask why would I want to specialize. Most Wizards that my players use, do not specialize.
I'm of the same opinion--I haven't seen any specialists in the games I've run or played in. Also, I really like the new rules--they add a lot more flavor to the specialist.
Honestly, I like the new system. I run a bunch of email game and often see new players. Too often, I hear new players ask why would I want to specialize. Most Wizards that my players use, do not specialize.gotta agree. Every game I've ever played in had no specialist casters.
Same here, no one wants to sacrifice the two schools for one extra bonus spell per level. I really like the new specialists.
As for domains, well they weren't that grand in the first place. And in truth the cleric held little appeal for those of my groups. Turn dead was ineffective most of the time, the domains weren't worth it.
I totally wanted to sacrifice the enchantment and necromancy schools for an extra spell per level. Comes in darn handy when you're playing in a game that doesn't do the "15 minute" adventuring day.
Does anyone role play anymore? Or is it all about just building the most bad ass character imaginable without any regard to a theme or concept?
My character was a specialist wizard focused on light-oriented spells. I severely limited his known spells list even further than just being a specialist to focus on light, fire, and force related spells and a few other miscellaneous things. He still kicked ass. Mainly because of that extra spell per level. At low levels, that's HUGE! A wizard can't just carry a bazillion scrolls around... they're too expensive to depend on like that. Plus, what happens when you're on the run from enemies that harass you for days and days on end and there's no chance to sit down and take a week off to just scribe scrolls?
A specialist wizard has WAAAAY more options than a sorceror, and dumping 2 little used schools wasn't much of a sacrifice for the extra spell per level. At least, in a game where the DM doesn't allow the "15 minute" adventuring day.
I've never actually played the 15 minute adventuring day. And I don't need to use the lousy specialist rules of 3.0/3.5 to build a concept...Heck, I don't even need them to specialize. Not in a school, not in a theme, and I maintain versatility no sacrifice needed. Especially not for an overpriced feature.
It seems to me that the specialists lose 1 spell / level / day in exchange for 1 spell like ability, not of their choosing, per level, limited times per day.
So, we go from variety in selection to no variety in selection. We go from a limited 1 spell / day to an increased number of times. And we go from a spell to a spell like ability based on Charisma. 'Cause Wizards are big on Charisma.
Some of the ideas I like... the idea of a power useful all day long. Cantrips that can be used forever. These are great ideas. I'm not sure that the powers chosen are all that great (abjurer's strikes me as particularly lame).
The idea of getting a spell like ability instead of the spell isn't a bad one. The idea of basing it off of charisma goes against everything a wizard is about.
The idea of forcing wizards to take a specific spell as their spell like ability takes away the ability of the player to customize their character and play a character that makes sense. I'm playing a generalist right now... just made level 2. Per the rules, I get to cast Shield 1/day as a spell like ability. Thus far, I haven't cast that spell once, and it isn't even on my spell list. Why would this be the spell my wizard would choose to have as a spell like ability? It isn't, but I'm stuck with it.
Aren't ALL wizards now specialists under PF? I mean, if oyu don;t choose a school, you become a universalist, right?
I'm with Rolflyn. The new superpowers assigned to the clerics and wizards are my least liked things in PFRPG and the main reason I'm not using it.
Infinite 0-level spells is awesome and a change I wholeheartedly agree with. It helps aleviate a shortcoming in the wizard's contributions to the group and can be interpreted in a way that makes sense in the setting.
The extra stuff, though, just seems to be there to make sure each character gets something new to do at every level, as if having adventures stops being fun if you don't have a new power to use during it. What's more, by making some of the supernatural abilities rather than just extra spells, it comes across as a superhero rather than a spellcaster. A priest of Gozreh shooting lightning from his hand at will sounds more like X-Men than Merlin.
So while I've already swiped the free 0-level castings, extra domain powers, a cleric's "burst" healing, and specialist bonuses (with soft restrictions on opposing schools) will be left out.